Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2025
Safety and User Experience of a Generative Artificial Intelligence Digital Mental Health Intervention: Exploratory Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05948670 (An Exploratory Randomized Controlled Trial of Participant Satisfaction With the BUILD Mobile Application), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
An Exploratory Randomized Controlled Trial of Participant Satisfaction With the BUILD Mobile Application
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Responsible artificial intelligence integration framework for psychiatric guidelines.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Guideline
- Frameworks, Methodologies, and Tools for Evaluating Large Language Models in Digital Mental Health Interventions: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Large Language Model-Based Behavioral Activation Chatbot for Young People With Depression Using Artificial Users and Clinical Experts: Mixed Methods Evaluation.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Safety-Oriented Evaluation of Large Language Models in Health Care: Guideline-Informed Systematic Review.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Review
- The Analytical Framework of Clinical Trials Evaluating Clinical Outcomes of Artificial Intelligence-Based Digital Health Interventions: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Review
- Safety Mechanisms and Risk Mitigation in Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots: A Systematic Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Psychosis Risk and Generative Artificial Intelligence Use Frequency, Motivations, and Delusion-Like Experiences: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks of Generative AI Mental-Health Chatbots: A Systematic Review and Regulatory Framework.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Evaluating Generative AI Psychotherapy Chatbots Used by Youth: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- H3-MOSAIC: multimodal generative AI for semantic place detection from high-frequency GPS on H3 grids in mental health geomatics.International journal of health geographics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneral awareness and exposure to generative artificial intelligence (AI) have increased recently. This transformative technology has the potential to create a more dynamic and engaging user experience in digital mental health interventions (DMHIs). However, if not appropriately used and controlled, it can introduce risks to users that may result in harm and erode trust. At the time of conducting this trial, there had not been a rigorous evaluation of an approach to safely implementing generative AI in a DMHI.
objectiveThis study aims to explore the user relationship, experience, safety, and technical guardrails of a DMHI using generative AI compared with a rules-based intervention.
methodsWe conducted a 2-week exploratory randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 160 adult participants randomized to receive a generative AI (n=81) or rules-based (n=79) version of a conversation-based DMHI. Self-report measures of the user relationship (client satisfaction, working alliance bond, and accuracy of empathic listening and reflection) and experience (engagement metrics, adverse events, and technical guardrail success) were collected. Descriptions and validation of technical guardrails for handling user inputs (eg, detecting potentially concerning language and off-topic responses) and model outputs (eg, not providing medical advice and not providing a diagnosis) are provided, along with examples to illustrate how they worked. Safety monitoring was conducted throughout the trial for adverse events, and the success of technical guardrails created for the generative arm was assessed post trial.
resultsIn general, the majority of measures of user relationship and experience appeared to be similar in both the generative and rules-based arms. The generative arm appeared to be more accurate at detecting and responding to user statements with empathy (98% accuracy vs 69%). There were no serious or device-related adverse events, and technical guardrails were shown to be 100% successful in posttrial review of generated statements. A majority of participants in both groups reported an increase in positive sentiment (62% and 66%) about AI at the end of the trial.
conclusionsThis trial provides initial evidence that, with the right guardrails and process, generative AI can be successfully used in a digital mental health intervention (DMHI) while maintaining the user experience and relationship. It also provides an initial blueprint for approaches to technical and conversational guardrails that can be replicated to build a safe DMHI.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05948670; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05948670.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.